OL Patch Posted February 1, 2012 Posted February 1, 2012 Hate to add another old guy view but you might find it amusing. Picture this: Mid 80s, I'm a young Lt first assignment dude at Bitburg, SQ/CC calls me in and says we gotta a slot for SOS do you wanna go...I say no rather stay and fly BFM..he is one of the Vietnam era F-4 patches...his response was cool: I'll find someone else! 1
discus Posted February 21, 2012 Posted February 21, 2012 Any recent/current SOS attendees know if there is an opportunity to shoot M9 for qual/expert at CATM during the course? Why would that course possibly want to teach anything even remotely related to warfighting? That's just crazy talk!
Guest Posted February 21, 2012 Posted February 21, 2012 Picture this: Mid 80s, I'm a young Lt first assignment dude at Bitburg Was Bubba Dixon there when you were there?
pawnman Posted February 21, 2012 Posted February 21, 2012 Any recent/current SOS attendees know if there is an opportunity to shoot M9 for qual/expert at CATM during the course? There is, at no time, any kind of weapons training.
Homestar Posted February 21, 2012 Posted February 21, 2012 You didn't get the nunchucks course? Shame.
Duck Posted February 22, 2012 Posted February 22, 2012 Wrong. Everyone is a weapon, therefore SOS is weapons training!
FUSEPLUG Posted March 3, 2012 Posted March 3, 2012 Hearing rumors of a "strongly-worded letter" from a student in the most recent SOS class to the leadership that is making its rounds. No details as to what it's about, other than it's a doosey. Anyone see this yet?
Cornholio5 Posted March 3, 2012 Posted March 3, 2012 Soon as someone gets a hold of it, put it on here!
Ram Posted March 3, 2012 Posted March 3, 2012 I have it on my .mil email account. Give me a few hours...it's Saturday here in Japan, and I can't find my home office CAC reader.
Swizzle Posted March 3, 2012 Posted March 3, 2012 I read not one, but TWO, such great letters from this last class...one is pure hate, the other hateful yet productive.... 1
Ram Posted March 3, 2012 Posted March 3, 2012 Here is the letter I was sent. A couple buddies of mine are there right now (for the 1st 8-week course), and they said that this letter is making the rounds. Standard disclaimer - I didn't write this, nor do I know the person who did. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear SOS, Well, you tried. You started off somewhat strong—there were great briefers (none of whom used powerpoint) and, though it’s tough to admit, some decent classroom topics and discussions. But after 7 weeks, I’ve had it. I just can’t drink the SOS Kool-Aid any longer. I’ve seen too many failures of leadership at the “leadership center of the Air Force.” I’ve seen too many “future leaders” stabbing each other in the back to try to get the coveted “DG” from SOS. I’ve seen too much wasted manpower, time, and money to stand it any longer. All is not lost. SOS has potential, and I’ll admit, from what I’ve heard about the past, it has come a long ways. You, the leadership, at least SEEM to care about the feedback you receive from the students. Well, in that spirit, here it is. Get ready, because it won’t be in the “everybody gets a trophy” spirit of today’s feedback sessions and OPRs. I’m going to ignore what you’re doing right, as well as the less important or obvious examples of what’s going wrong, and get right to the meat of the matter. Please listen. Understand that this isn’t one disgruntled student. This is a consensus of the overwhelming majority of SOS students. We’re not automatically bitter about this place, and we certainly came here with open minds. We want to see this place improve, for the good of those after us and the Air Force in general. And, from the perspective of the students, here is how we see it happening: First and foremost, get your act together. It seemed from day one you were on the defensive—telling us not to get bitter about the 8-week course and that this curriculum will be “good, but not perfect.” Even though you had something like 6 months to prep, I understand that rarely does anything go perfect on the first try. But come on. It’s not just the 4.5-hour average day. I wouldn’t feel bad about that if I didn’t know that the bro’s back at home station were now working 14 (as opposed to the usual 12) hour days to make up for my absence. It’s the half-assed briefs on AFPC, the Air Operations Center, the Coast Guard, Alabama Homeland Security and AFSO-21 that seem like they were not for our benefit but simply to fill time. It’s the fact that you want us to pay “attention to detail” on games like FLEX, only to have your “referees” demonstrate an egregious lack of understanding of the rules. It’s the fact that TAV, which is supposed to test our ability to plan and execute a war, was turned into simply an exercise in patience and composure as the computers continually crashed and failed to execute as they should. It’s the debacle that ensued from the FRLM essay, and now our only graded written piece is for naught (more to follow on this). It’s the fact that every assignment that’s given to us seems to be hastily drawn up and has contradicting requirements and standards. It’s the fact that even the commandant himself can’t seem to express a clear message (“…get your master’s degree! No you’re not just checking a box. We want to you to increase your thinking ability, which is done the same whether you go to TORO or Harvard…”). There are so many examples—these are a few of the glaring ones. Taken individually, they seem to be minor inconveniences. Taken as a whole, they paint a picture of a program that is wholly unprepared to execute its mission. If you hear nothing else please hear this, stop rewarding the “me-first,” cutthroat attitude that may have a place in the civilian word, but not in a brotherhood of arms. Now I’m not naïve, I know that this has always been and always will be a problem. And I also recognize that the bigger problem is that “mother Air Force” sees “DG” from SOS as being something other than the ball-wash that is truly is. Regardless, the fact that so many people will do anything to walk away with “DG” has led to it having a stigma amongst the CGO’s. The fact that almost everyone who comprises the student council usually walks away with DG is the best example of this problem. Do you really think that those guys are the future leaders of the Air Force? Are you saying the student council president is someone who deserves to be a leader in tomorrow’s Air Force? That guy has demonstrated such a shocking deficiency of interpersonal and leadership skills that it would be laughable if it wasn’t so sad. But this isn’t a vendetta against one guy. It’s against the system that rewards the wrong kind of leadership. Let’s find a way to actually recognize the people who actually have potential to change the Air Force. There are myriad ways to accomplish this. If you are seriously out of ideas, grab a pitcher of Jack and Coke at the O’Club and sit down with one of the guys playing crud. I’ve heard more than a few good ideas thrown around, all of which beat the current system in place. You heard it straight from the most respected member of the staff, Dr. Stafford: “we need to change the style and persona of the leadership of the Air Force.” What better place to start than the schoolhouse for tomorrow’s leaders? Along those lines, you need to either disband the student council entirely, or at a minimum change the method in which it is selected. I know a good number of the people on Class 12B’s student council, and I literally believe that only one of those people has the interest of the entire class truly at heart (and that person is there involuntarily). The rest are there for the wrong reasons; specifically, to “play the game” and get their name and face out there for senior leadership. How can I say this? Let’s look objectively. The first speech the president made, he was booed off the stage as a result of his inability to communicate effectively. After that, he tried to fraudulently use funds raised in the name of charity to buy a class gift—a gift that would only serve to enhance the standing of the few people on student council in the eyes of the senior leadership. Following the uproar from that debacle, student council proceeded to do nothing except pass up ridiculous ideas that do not serve the general student body; rather, they serve their own personal agendas. Here’s just a few of the gems that I’ve heard were discussed at student council meetings: “let’s have everyone submit their GRE scores with their SOS applications” (genius!!), “FLEX counts too much/little towards overall flight standings” (guys…it’s dodgeball…really??), “the FRLM essay should be thrown out of DG consideration” (I bet my career that whomever brought up this gem got less than an A on his/her paper), “we shouldn’t have to wear blues on Mondays” (no shit, 100% true statement), “we should throw out the team challenge,” etc. etc. etc. The bottom line is that it’s become a place for personal or flight agendas to be pushed in lieu of actual, legitimate ideas. What’s not being mentioned at student council meetings? How about the fact that the leadership here does nothing but espouse outside-the-box thinking, critical analysis and leadership, only to reward followership, yes-men, and a failure to challenge the status quo? How about the fact that that everyone—from the students to the upper leadership at SOS—seem to agree that the course is too long, only to feel hamstrung to the 8 weeks because they are afraid to speak their mind? How about the fact that we place so much emphasis on flight performance here, only to essentially leave up to chance the flight one is assigned to? How about the fact that one unmotivated, out-of-shape person in the flight can ruin the 8 weeks of effort by an entire flight in one morning? How about the fact that the cold, hard truth is that the SOS flight commanders are at or near the bottom rung of people in their peer group, and yet we entrust them to judge and grade the next generation of our Air Force’s leaders? How about the larger problem of placing too much emphasis on SOS in general? Have you seen the YouTube video of an OPR review? The comments there ring true, but a blind eye is turned to it by the leadership here and of the Air Force. If we are going to enact the legitimate, true, required change, this is the place to do it! I think most people here get that, but the people who volunteer for student council (the Kool-Aid drinking yes men) are afraid to say it. So let’s make student council either a randomly assigned or constantly shifting role. That way you can at least try to rotate out the people who are there for the wrong reasons. Listen, I get it. I really do. I’m not trying to blindly ramble on and rage against a system that is obviously at least functional. The Air Force has done the J-O-B for the past 65 years, and it continues to operate well enough to get the job done. It could most definitely be doing a worse job. But it could also be doing a much better job. And if we are serious about wanting to be a leaner, more efficient force, it’s time to really revamp our way of doing things. That starts here at SOS. Let’s rethink this school and what it teaches. Let’s work together to really create the next generation of leaders. Let’s eliminate the waste here at SOS, let’s stop wasting the time of our CGO’s, and let’s start rewarding the right kind of future leaders. We can’t afford to fail. -SOS Class 12B -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2
pawnman Posted March 3, 2012 Posted March 3, 2012 I'm sorry that I missed it. It seems like exactly the kind of feedback they kept asking for on the end of course surveys. Hopefully they will read this in the spirit it was written and fix some of the problems with the course.
ViperStud Posted March 3, 2012 Posted March 3, 2012 Pawnman, if recent history teaches us anything it's that the course will not be fixed. I hope I'm wrong but I take the more cynical approach. Unfortunately the writer shacked it by pointing out that the SOS instructors are the bottom-feeders of their peer groups. That applies for the overwhelming majority of the cadre. Who the F wants to leave a cockpit from the Ops/FTU/UPT world to do that? Apparently the drug deal is that SOS instructors get a guaranteed school slot on the back end (or their SOS tour counts as school - forget how it was explained to me by my SOS instructor), so the dudes going there to teach are the same back-stabber careerist types that went to SOS and had their sights set on DG from day one. The SOS system is a self-licking ice cream cone that encourages career underachievers to either (A) turn on their "High Speed" switch for a single TDY in hopes of getting a DG or (B) go back there to teach with a guarantee of IDE in-residence credit on the back end, which is essentially a back-door way to Lt Col for someone who would never have been selected for promotion/school in the first place. Unfortunately the bullshit fake leadership of the "student council" types passes as legit, because the instructors evaluating them were the SAME PEOPLE 4-5 years ago as SOS students. When I was there a few years back we were the "test class" for the big debate that was to take the place of the academic test. Is the debate still part of the curriculum? Our topic was - the fundamental qualities of good leadership are timeless and apply to ancient cultures just the same as they do to present day society. Talk about dry content. Needless to say the whole debate was not taken seriously. During the hotwash I asked our instructor (turns out the debate was his brainchild) why they had chosen such a stupid topic. If they wanted us to get involved why not give us something topical that we could get our arms around and really debate? His response was that it was an appropriate topic for the premiere military leadership school in the world (he really said that). He asked what would be better. I literally chuckled, then said I'd give him two examples (1) Get the F out of Afghanistan and (2) allow gays to openly serve in the military. After about 10 seconds of classic deer-in-headlights blank staring, he went into some mindless drivel about those topics being too controversial. My response was that no intelligent person could call us the premiere blah blah blah in the world if we are afraid to tackle a controversial topic. Again, blank stare and eventual subject change. My point is that making SOS useful would take real thought and a lot of work because it would have to be rebuilt from the ground up. There is no hope whatsoever for the cadre there to enact such change because they are exactly the back-door promotion careerist types that have benefited from the system as it stands. They truly believe they are doing the right thing and that SOS is "cutting edge." WTF are we going to do, can the upper half of SOS cadre and non-vol some quality ops/mx/intel dudes from the CAF/MAF to start over? That's what it would take. Not gonna happen because no one has the balls to do it.
Chuck17 Posted March 3, 2012 Posted March 3, 2012 My point is that making SOS useful would take real thought and a lot of work because it would have to be rebuilt from the ground up. There is no hope whatsoever for the cadre there to enact such change because they are exactly the back-door promotion careerist types that have benefited from the system as it stands. They truly believe they are doing the right thing and that SOS is "cutting edge." WTF are we going to do, can the upper half of SOS cadre and non-vol some quality ops/mx/intel dudes from the CAF/MAF to start over? That's what it would take. Not gonna happen because no one has the balls to do it. Truth. How much REAL thought do you think happens there? Why debate things that matter now, that you have to use deductive reasoning to formulate an argument that is supportable? Why not make you debate something that 6900 books has been written about (all of the books are in the library of course)...? If we require you to THINK and articulate... some people might fail... quell horror. I know two guys, both WO's, both school selects, who got SOS Instructor with IDE follow-on as their school on their first look. Think those guys wanted to go? Think they were at the bottom of the pile? I dont. Both are O-5s, DO's, on their way to being sq/cc's. I think theyre doing fine. I also think they are most definitely the exception. Chuck 1
Homestar Posted March 4, 2012 Posted March 4, 2012 (edited) My experience in 2010 was that we were just a bunch of average dudes trying to make it through 5 weeks of class. I know that there were flights that battled the fast burner mentality, but I really think that was the minority of our overall group. I really didn't interact with anyone outside our 15-person flight, so if there were backstabbers out there they only managed to stab others. SOS wasn't my favorite TDY in the Air Force, but I managed to come home without the trauma that others seem to experience. Edited March 4, 2012 by Homestar
HEFOE P Posted March 4, 2012 Posted March 4, 2012 I want to see a formal response from the SOS commandant. For those of us highly trained ASBC graduates (the few, the proud), can we be exempt from 8 more weeks of the exact same curriculum and debauchery? I can not WAIT to get there and do this. Can't wait.
Homestar Posted March 4, 2012 Posted March 4, 2012 For those of us highly trained ASBC graduates (the few, the proud), can we be exempt from 8 more weeks of the exact same curriculum and debauchery? Sure, you don't have to go to SOS.
Skitzo Posted March 4, 2012 Posted March 4, 2012 I'm in the next class, 2004 year group guy, I consider myself lucky to go because there are a lot more people that need to go and not enough slots for them all to go. Word on the street is that it won't matter if you went in residence or by correspondence... until I hear that from the CSAF I won't believe it. From my perspective I have far less expectations of this course. I expect to go, learn what I can and hopefully gain some perspective on how the rest of the Air Force does business and make some friendships. If Al Udeid is to Combat as SOS is to CGO PME I'm fine with that and hopefully I will be able to change it, otherwise I'm going to have as much fun as I can. I'm not worried about DG, I have not been a DG from any formal training program so far so I apparently lack the required prof level of backstabbing to even be worried about it WRT SOS 1
guineapigfury Posted March 4, 2012 Posted March 4, 2012 I'm in the next class, 2004 year group guy, I consider myself lucky to go because there are a lot more people that need to go and not enough slots for them all to go. Word on the street is that it won't matter if you went in residence or by correspondence... until I hear that from the CSAF I won't believe it. I'll believe it when I see the promotion stats for in residence/in correspondence guys being exactly the same. 1
ThreeHoler Posted March 4, 2012 Posted March 4, 2012 I'll believe it when I see the promotion stats for in residence/in correspondence guys being exactly the same. It already is...if you get a DP.
Skitzo Posted March 4, 2012 Posted March 4, 2012 Considering I only got an R on the RIF board, I guess it can only help me
sigmanugary Posted March 5, 2012 Posted March 5, 2012 So this was "the letter" my Flt/CC was talking about as I was leaving...wow, pretty harsh stuff in there. My perspective was different I guess because my flight was pretty cool and my interaction with the student council was nil. The problem I have with this letter is that Capt Schmuck-atelly didn't sign his name...weak shit. Yes, 8 weeks is a long time but I was grateful to go. We were given plenty of opportunities to give feedback (i.e tons of surveys). Calling out the entire cadre of instructors was poor form however the ghost writer had valid points on some of the briefing topics. Oh yeah, the backstabbing...my flight had zero (FWIW, we had 4x DGs and grad'd top third). It should be noted that none of us sang in the chorus or starred in the "Airmen Ideal" video during graduation; we just showed up to work every day and made the best of it. Personally, I played a lot of MW3 and worked out.
Swizzle Posted March 5, 2012 Posted March 5, 2012 (edited) The problem I have with this letter is that Capt Schmuck-atelly didn't sign his name...weak shit. I agree, he was too timid. He was the type who doesn't want to be seen as playing that game, but plays it. He had some great insights, big-picture perspectives, and honestly led a group through a tough spot. The letter would have more impact if he revealed himself but don't hold your breath.... (edit: grammar) Edited March 5, 2012 by Swizzle
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now